First, read here the history of Wordle, so I don't have to repeat it.
Simply put, it's a fun daily, one-shot word game that was recently bought by (cue thunder and lightning) The New York Times.
I only started playing the game a few weeks before the purchase became public, so I'm not as vested in the "original" Wordle, nor have I seen much of a change in the New York Times version.
Others, on the other hand, have stronger feelings.
Some of the feelings include:
1. Wordle is getting harder.
2. Wordle is suddenly using double letters when in the past it avoided them.
3. Wordle is prioritizing American spelling (favor vs. favour) to British spelling. Nevermind that the key of the game is to guess a five-letter word.
These and other factors have causes no shortage of consernation and hubbub among the Wordle long-timers. Thus, and thus.
I'm only really here, of course, to share some Wordle theory. The columnist in the last link laments that others have proven "maths" is the best way to beat Wordle, and since she's terrible at maths and the NYT took over, she's outta here.
Maybe so.
But there are also sound linguistic strategies that come into play. My theory:
Step 1: Eliminate consonants early on. This pairs with
Step 2: Eliminate letter patterns. If, for example, the letter H doesn't appear in the word, it's not likely you'll see such parings as TH, SH, CH, PH, and probably others I've missed in the word. That eliminates consonants without ever having to type them in.
Step 3: Eliminating consonants and letter patterns also decreases your reliance on luck, though luck does still play a part.
And to all the complainers, I'll echo what good friend Dennis Gaunt shared with me about the complaints:
Some truly MAGNIFICENT pearl-clutching here.
No comments:
Post a Comment